The Administration of the Sultanate of Dehli c9: Chapter IV: The Royal Household

The Administration of the Sultanate of Dehlī c9

Language: English

Chapter IV: The Royal Household

c9.2

A CONSCIENTIOUS sultan was one of the hardest worked The ceremonial. men in the realm; for instance Sher Shāh spent about ten hours every day with only short breaks for meals and prayers in discharging his public duties.¹ This does not include the time taken up in deliberation and consultation with the more trusted officials and ministers. A life spent in the limelight of splendour and magnificence in full view of the people must have been exceedingly exacting; it is not surprising that weaker natures sought solace in pleasure-seeking and merry-making; even the sterner monarchs turned for relaxation to hunting, music and poetry. The ceremonial darbārs and processions, the endless banquets and celebrations, which were kept up even when the royal household was on the march, were political institutions of utilitarian value, for they captured the imagination of the people and impressed them with the majesty of their rulers to the extent that even to-day the might and grandeur of kings are favourite themes of Indian folklore. So great was the awe which this pomp inspired that ambassadors and tributaries were known to faint when ushered into the august presence of the sultan.² The contemporary historians give excellent descriptions of these functions; the accounts of the eye-witness, Ibn Baṭṭūṭah, are specially interesting.³ All these narrations leave an impression of great splendour and magnificence on the mind. Apart from their spectacular value, these public shows enabled the sultan to keep in touch with his subjects and to minister to the needs of the humble and the poor. When he rode out in a procession, any suppliant could draw his attention by holding up a petition or crying aloud for protection.¹ The general audience was the occasion for the persecuted and the needy to claim the sultan's protection; he generally heard their grievances and complaints.² It was in these public darbārs that the sovereign discharged the formal duties appertaining to his office. Matters requiring discussion and deliberation or involving secrecy were dealt with in the council chamber where only those officers were admitted whose advice was required.³ The private audience was less exclusive and was attended by the greater nobles and officers of the state.⁴ The more important members of the secretariat were also in attendance.⁵ The bulk of state business was conducted here the sultan talent was rewarded and failure censured; ambassadors from foreign countries and tributaries received; robes of honour and marks of distinction bestowed; tribute and presents from Hindu rājahs and Muslim governors displayed; and appointments to higher grades of service made and announced. Some of this business was transacted on special occasions in a public audience.

c9.3

¹ Sarwānī, ff. 66-69; Mushtāqī, ff. 48a-49b.

c9.4

² Baranī, pp. 30-32.

c9.5

³ Minhāj, pp. 316-319; Baranī, pp. 30-33; ‘Afīf, pp. 280-287 I.B., ii, pp. 55-39; Masālik-u’l-abṣār, pp. 10, 49-52; Khazā’in-u’l-futūḥ, pp. 181-184; Qirān-u’s-sa’dain, pp. 52, 53.

c9.6

¹ E.g., ‘Afīf, p. 448.

c9.7

² Sarwānī, f. 67b.

c9.8

³ ‘Afīf, p. 278.

c9.9

⁴ Idem, pp. 277-278.

c9.10

⁵ Idem, p. 279.

c9.11

The diversity of the business and the requirements of a spectacular ceremonial necessitated the attendance of a large number of men of various ranks. They had to be carefully marshalled, the order of their precedence exactly defined, and even the manner of their salutation formally prescribed. The dignity of the monarch required that everything should work smoothly and with clock-work precision. All this required a big staff of officers, ushers and heralds. There were the sultan's bodyguard, his personal attendants, the palace guards, the staff required to serve the inmates of the royal household.

c9.12

palace and a host of other workers. Besides, a few state departments were treated as part of the palace organization. Thus the royal household played an important part in the government of the sultanate, not only because courtiers always possess influence in a polity of which the monarch is the pivot, but also on account of its actual share in the administrative machinery of the state. A discussion of its organization will indicate its importance.¹

c9.13

The chief dignitary of the household was the *wakīl-i-dar*.¹ *Wakīl-i-dar.* Under the Abbasids the office had assumed great importance, though it was known by the name of *ustād-u’d-dar*. So influential was this post that, under the weaker caliphs, it was the *amīr-u’l-umarā* who held it; the Buwayhid princes even adopted the title as a mark of distinction.² The office sank into insignificance under the later Abbasids, but at other courts it was always bestowed on a noble of rank and prestige.³ The *wakīl-i-dar* controlled the entire household and supervised the payment of allowances and salaries to the sovereign’s personal staff.⁴ The royal kitchen, the *sharābkhānah*, the stables, and even the royal children were under his care.⁵ All royal orders relating to the household were communicated through him; it was he who reported all affairs requiring royal sanction.⁶ He had a separate secretariat where every order was first registered and then received the impression of his seal.⁷ As the courtiers and *nadīms*, the princes, the queens and all forming part of the royal household or dependent on it had to approach him, the *wakīl-i-dar* exercised great influence and was, in many respects, considered to be, the sultan’s deputy.⁸ As he was always dealing with men of importance, he had to be exceedingly tactful, and the office could not be a mere sinecure. If he had not possessed rank and ability, he could not have discharged his duties efficiently. Even his staff had to be selected very carefully.¹ He had to keep the sultan well-informed regarding the affairs under his control, and, therefore, had need of vigilance, because most of the important personages, with whom he had dealings, had themselves direct access to the sultan.² The *wakīl-i-dar* was by no means a mere *maître d'hôtel*, because his powers were extensive and his jurisdiction embraced men and women of great political importance, so much so that the office was sometimes held by men who were virtually regents to the reigning monarch.³ He was not the royal representative in the *darbār*, nor should he be confused with the Mughal *wakīl-u's-salṭanah* who was the chief minister.⁴ Under Ghaznavid rule the governors and other officials serving in the provinces kept their agents at the court through whom all official correspondence was conducted.⁵ An agent of this type was styled the *wakīl-i-dar* of his master, but his position was entirely different from that of the royal *wakīl-i-dar* in the sultanate of Dehlī. This officer had existed under the Ghaznavids but was known by a different name; he was called *ṣāḥib-i-dīwān-i-wikālat*.⁶ The *wakīl-i-dar* was the controller of the household. Under Humāyūn he was called *wakīl-i-dar-i-khānah* and had not lost his importance, in spite of the fact that there was a separate functionary called *mīr-i-sāmān* to look after household stores.⁷ The *wakīl-i-dar* was assisted by another noble of standing who was styled *nā'ib wakīl-i-dar*.⁸

c9.14

¹ E.g., Baranī, p. 576.

c9.15

² History of the Saracens, p. 411.

c9.16

³ Siyāsat-nāmah, p. 81.

c9.17

⁴ Minhāj, p. 298; Nāzim, p. 147.

c9.18

⁵ Siyāsat-nāmah, p. 82.

c9.19

⁶ A.M., f. 43a.

c9.20

⁷ Ibid.

c9.21

⁸ Ibid., ff. 42b-43b

c9.22

¹ A.M., f. 43a.

c9.23

² *Siyāsat-nāmah*, p. 82.

c9.24

³ E.g., 'Imād-u'd-dīn Raiḥān when Balban was sent away from Nāṣir-u'd-dīn Maḥmūd's court, Minhāj, p 298.

c9.25

⁴ Raverty's translation of the *Ṭabaqāt-i-Nāṣirī*, p. 287; *Ā'īn-i-Akbarī*, i, p. 4. Blochmann calls the *wakīl-u's-salṭanah* 'the emperor's lieutenant in all matters connected with the realm and the household' (i, p. v); but the text is "نائب ملکی و مالی باشد" which is more in accord with the context and should be translated as 'lieutenant in all political and financial matters.'

c9.26

⁵ Baihaqī, e.g., pp. 93, 96.

c9.27

⁶ Nāẓim, p. 147.

c9.28

⁷ *Akbar nāmah*, i, pp. 202, 306.

c9.29

⁸ Baranī, pp. 36, 275.

c9.30

Almost equal in importance and rank was the amīr ḥājib who was also styled bārbek.¹ European authorities generally call him ‘the chief chamberlain’—a term which does not exactly connote the functions and duties of this office.² The bārbek was the master of ceremonies at the court; it was his duty to marshal the nobles and the officials in accordance with the precedence of their rank and to safeguard the dignity of all royal functions. His assistants—the ḥājibs—stood between the sovereign and his subjects and nobody could enter the royal presence without being introduced by them.³ They conveyed messages from their royal master to suppliants and officials.⁴ All petitions were presented to the sultan through the amīr ḥājib or his subordinates.⁵ “The affairs of all grades of men were managed through the bestowal of his indulgent attention.”⁶ His post, therefore, commanded great prestige, and was generally reserved for princes of royal blood or the sultan's most trusted nobles.⁷ Even the nā’ib bārbek, whose duty was to assist the superior officer, was often a near relation or a friend of the sultan.⁸ It was one of his special duties to make arrangements for the more important celebrations.⁹ Sometimes a nā’ib bārbek was associated with some other noble to act as the sultan's deputy in his absence from the capital.¹⁰ The monarch had practically always a few ḥājibs in attendance, and one or two of these waited on him when he was alone or even closeted with his nobles in consultation. Probably these selected ḥājibs were styled *khāṣ ḥājib*.¹ Some leading ḥājibs were given special titles, such as *sayyid-u'l-ḥujjāb* or *sharaf-u'l-ḥujjāb*.² The ḥājibs were mostly trained soldiers and were often entrusted with the command of military expeditions.³ When the sultan in person took the field, the ḥājibs acted as his *aides-de-camp*.⁴ One of the ḥājibs was assigned the duty of making inventories of all presents received by the monarch and was called *ḥājib-i-faṣl*.⁵ The leading ḥājibs were often invited by the monarch to attend councils of war and their advice carried weight.⁶ Except those who were on the lower rungs of the service, they were important officials of state and were by no means merely courtiers or household officers.⁷ It is not surprising, therefore, that some *amīr ḥājibs* seized the regency under weak monarchs.⁸

c9.31

¹ The evidence is conclusive. Throughout the period, the terms are interchangeable and always indicate the same man, e.g., Baranī, pp. 24, 61; ‘Afif, p. 42

c9.32

² E.g., Raverty in his translation of the Tabaqāt-i-Nāṣirī (p 821) calls him ‘Lord Chamberlain’.

c9.33

³ I.B., ii, pp. 80-82.

c9.34

⁴ A M., f. 43b; ‘Afif, p. 60; Qirān-u’s-sa’dain, p. 53.

c9.35

⁵ I.B., ii, p. 53; Baranī, p. 578.

c9.36

⁶ Dastūr-u’l-kātib fī ta’yīn-i’l-marātib, f. 90a

c9.37

⁷ Baranī, pp. 36, 37, 61; Baihaqī, p. 7.

c9.38

⁸ ‘Afif, pp. 42, 428.

c9.39

⁹ Idem, p. 361.

c9.40

¹⁰ Idem, p. 431, also, Baranī, p. 509

c9.41

¹ 'Utbī uses the words *ḥājib-i-khāṣ*, *amīr ḥājib* and *ḥājib-i-kabīr* for the same man, Altūntāsh (pp. 342, 349, 406). The *khāṣ ḥājib* was certainly different from the *amīr ḥājib* in the sultanate of Dehlī; Baranī (p. 36) mentions a *khāṣ ḥājib* along with the *amīr ḥājib*. Both of these officials are mentioned by name. The term *amīr-u'l-ḥujjāb* is only a variation of *amīr ḥājib*; there is little ground to believe that they are different, vide Minhāj, p. 302 and Raverty's note in his translation of the *Ṭabaqāt-i-Nāṣirī*, p. 820. Under Sher Shāh the officer was sometimes styled *ḥājibdār*, Dā'ūdī, f. 87a. I.B. (ii, p. 53) states that the *amīr ḥājib*, *khāṣ ḥājib*, *sayyid-u'l-ḥujjāb* and *sharaf-u'l-ḥujjāb* received petitions from suppliants to the sultan's justice.

c9.42

² I.B., ii, p. 52 ; Baranī, pp. 527-528.

c9.43

³ 'Utbī, p. 186 ; Minhāj, p. 173 ; Baranī, p. 322.

c9.44

⁴ E.g., Baihaqī, p. 662 ; Baranī, p. 90.

c9.45

⁵ Qirān-u's-sa'dain, p. 93. Also called *ḥājib-i-faṣṣal*, idem, p. 85.

c9.46

⁶ Baihaqī, pp. 585-586 ; Qirān-u's-sa'dain, p. 64; *Khazā'in-u'l-futūḥ*, p. 96.

c9.47

⁷ Minhāj, pp. 7, 199, 260 ; Baranī, pp. 113, 322, etc.

c9.48

⁸ Baihaqī, p. 13 ; Minhāj, p. 192.

c9.49

Equally prominent in all ceremonial functions, though of much inferior rank, were the ushers or *naqībs*.⁹ They were also used to proclaim orders to the soldiers and to the populace. They ran in front of the royal cavalcade announcing in a loud voice the presence of the sultan.¹⁰ Their chief was called the *naqīb-u'l-nuqabā*, whose insignia of office consisted of a gold mace and a gold tiara surmounted with peacock feathers. He sat on a platform in front of the door leading into the hall of audience and scrutinized every new-comer.¹ He and his assistants delivered the formal eulogies on occasions of feasts and celebrations.²

c9.50

⁹ Baranī, p. 30.

c9.51

¹⁰ I.B., ii, p. 36.

c9.52

¹ I.B., pp. 218-219.

c9.53

² *Idem*, pp. 240-241.

c9.54

The sultans had a number of picked soldiers called *jāndārs* who acted as his bodyguard; only tall, handsome, brave young men of impressive physique were chosen to serve in this capacity. They were given a full military training and great care was bestowed on their uniforms and equipment. It was their duty to be present on all occasions when the sultan appeared in public. Balban employed Sīstānī soldiers and paid them sixty to seventy thousand *jitals* a year.³ These men surrounded the sovereign with drawn swords, which added to the magnificence of his processions and, at the same time, impressed his people.⁴ The *jāndārs* were generally slaves of proved loyalty and were commanded by a trustworthy noble who was styled *sar-jāndār*; sometimes there were two *sar-jāndārs*, one for the right and the other for the left.⁵ They were no longer employed in Dehlī either as armour-bearers or doorkeepers, whatever may have been their duties when they were first appointed by Muslim rulers outside India.⁶ Another body of fully armed soldiers called *silahdārs* waited on the sultan when he gave public audience or rode out.⁷ Their leader was called *sar-silahdār*; there were generally two *sar-silahdārs*, one for each wing.⁸ The female quarters were guarded by eunuchs.⁹ As the Prophet had prohibited human castration, the Muslims imported eunuchs from the neighbouring countries. Even the custom of employing eunuchs to guard the female quarters was adopted from the Byzantine and other non-Muslim courts.¹ Hindu rulers had large numbers of eunuchs in their palaces; indeed Viṣṇu prescribes it as necessary for a king to have them to guard his wives.² The eunuchs also acted as messengers between the inmates of the harem and the outer world. Minor household posts were given to them, and they served the sultan as attendants in his private chambers. Occasionally a very capable eunuch impressed the monarch with his intelligence or efficiency and even rose to a position of power.³ For the inner pavilions and halls outside the female quarters there was another guard called sarā-pardahdārān-i-khāṣ.⁴ An important noble was their leader.⁵ Special care was taken at night when a trusted official called "the officer of the gates" inspected all the doors to see that they were properly bolted and barred, and that the guards were in their places.⁶ An additional body of picked infantry, mostly consisting of slaves, was kept in readiness and formed part of the royal guard in hunts and processions.⁷ A number of mufrads were also used as guards.⁸

c9.55

³ *Baranī*, p. 30.

c9.56

⁴ *Ibid.*

c9.57

⁵ *Baranī*, p. 24. Sometimes there were even more. I do not understand Raverty's difficulty (*Tabaqāt-i-Nāsiri*, English translation, p. 603, note 7) in reconciling the idea that the *jāndārs* were slaves with the fact that they were sometimes commanded by free nobles

c9.58

⁶ No *jāndār* is mentioned as doing these duties by the contemporary historians. There was a separate *shahnah-i-zarrād khānah*; Minhāj, p 254.

c9.59

⁷ I.B., ii, p. 36; *Baranī*, p. 30.

c9.60

⁸ *Baranī*, p. 24, also called *mīr silah*, *Qurān-u's-sa'dam*, p. 96.

c9.61

⁹ Hence the title of *khwājah sarā*, e.g., *Baranī*, p. 375.

c9.62

¹ V.K., pp. 171-172; Mez., p. 353.

c9.63

² Viṣṇu, iii, 21.

c9.64

³ E.g., Malik Kāfūr, Malik Qaranfal.

c9.65

⁴ ‘Afīf, p. 279.

c9.66

⁵ Called pardahdār-i-khāṣ Baihaqī, p. 817.

c9.67

⁶ Called ‘uhdahdār-i-darhā; Baranī, p. 406.

c9.68

⁷ Baranī, pp. 273, 376

c9.69

⁸ Qurān-u’s-sa’dain, p. 140. For a fuller description of mufrads, vide infra, chapter VII.

c9.70

The minor officers of the household can be described in a few words. There was the usual host of domestic and personal servants organized according to their duties. The library was under a kutābdār; the chāshnigīr supervised the kitchen, tasted the food and carved the meat for the sultan.⁹ The sharābdār was responsible for drink which was served by the sāqī-i-khāṣ.¹ The chief farrāsh looked after the furniture and the tents, the ṭashtdār was the ewer-bearer, who helped the sultan in his ablutions, and the mashʿalahdār was responsible for the lights.² The royal writing case was kept by the dawātdār, the intimate personal attendant was the āghāchī, and the registrar of the palace was dabīr-i-sarā.³ The bahlahdār, also known as khazīnahdār, was the keeper of the privy purse.⁴ The sar-chatrdār was the chief of the umbrella bearers; the amīr-i-tuzuk looked after the royal insignia; the qūrbeg was responsible for the sultan's arms.⁵ The monarch's personal arms and armour were in charge of the khaṣahdār.⁶ The royal physician was generally styled malik-u'l-ḥukamā.⁷

c9.71

⁹ Minhāj, pp. 232, 261, 265. The kitābdār was also called muṣḥaf bardār. Also, I. B., ii, p. 71.

c9.72

¹ Minhāj, pp. 242, 251. Sharāb means anything to drink, not necessarily alcoholic. Another reading is sar-ābdār, 'the head water keeper.'

c9.73

² Baihaqī, pp. 11, 817; Minhāj, pp. 248, 249, 254; Baranī, p. 183, I.B., ii, p. 89.

c9.74

³ Minhāj, p. 242; Baihaqī, pp. 817, 819.

c9.75

⁴ Minhāj, pp. 248, 254.

c9.76

⁵ Baranī, pp. 126, 241, 527.

c9.77

⁶ Minhāj, p. 265.

c9.78

⁷ Baranī, pp. 454, 455.

c9.79

The royal family seem to have exercised remarkably little influence in politics, though they enjoyed great prestige. The senior queen was styled malikah-i-jahān, and the queen mother bore the title of khudāwandah-i-jahān, or, more commonly, of makhdūmah-i-jahān.⁸ Little is on record regarding the power they may have exercised behind the scenes, but, apart from Raḍiyah who was a queen in her own right, only two seem to have interfered in the affairs of state. Shāh Turkān, mother of Rukn-u'd-dīn Fīrūz, a lady noted for her patronage of learning and charity, medled in politics with disastrous results.⁹ Jalāl-u'd-dīn Khaljī's widow raised her son Rukn-u'd-dīn Ibrāhīm to the throne but could not keep him there.¹ Muḥammad bin Tughluq’s mother was known for her benevolent philanthropy and liberality to the poor; her social influence was very great.² Dehlī remained remarkably immune from petticoat intrigue and wire-pulling; the sultanate never knew a sultan validé who practically ruled the Ottoman Empire during the days of its decay.³ In so strenuous a period, only a man’s strong hand could steer the ship of the state. The princes were given a good general and literary education: the sultanate produced a large number of cultured princes.⁴ They also received military training and were soon trusted with commands in the army or with governorships. Other royal relations were treated according to their antecedents and the temper of the monarch and his supporters. Some of them enjoyed positions of responsibility and trust; others, if they were considered dangerous, were imprisoned, mutilated or executed.⁵

c9.80

⁸ Minhāj, p. 181; Baranī, p. 482.

c9.81

⁹ Minhāj, pp. 182-185. Her intrigues cost her son Rukn-u'd-dīn Fīrūz his throne.

c9.82

¹ Barani, pp. 238, 239. Her action alienated the elder son who could have had some chance against ‘Alā-u’d-dīn Khaljī.

c9.83

² Barani, pp. 482, 483.

c9.84

³ During the so-called “reign of women.”

c9.85

⁴ E.g., Balban’s two sons, Muḥammad bin Tughluq, Sikandar Lodī, etc.

c9.86

⁵ E.g., Fīrūz Shāh, Kishlī Khān, etc., were treated well; ‘Afif, p. 42; Barani, p. 113; Jalāl-u’d-dīn Khaljī’s sons and relations were imprisoned or executed by ‘Alā-u’d-dīn; Barani, pp. 249, 250.

c9.87

The slaves were an integral part of the royal household and played an important part in the administration of the country. The Abbasids were the first Muslim dynasty to employ large numbers of Turkish slaves; but, in perfecting this organization, they were training their own future masters. The tradition, however, persisted, and the Turkish rulers maintained this method of recruiting new blood to their own ranks; slaves became, in varying degrees, an integral part of the government machinery.⁶ The system had certain obvious advantages. Each slave had to struggle for promotion, and usually rose by sheer merit. He climbed from the lowest rungs of the ladder, thus gaining invaluable experience; the very buffets of fortune made him strong and hardy. Besides, there was a personal bond between the monarch and the slave which was sanctified by sentiment and custom; for slaves were treated kindly and were looked upon as members of the family. They were well provided for and even inherited their master's property. Slavery did not imply any disgrace; it was, on the other hand, a source of pride to belong to a great man's household. The master also took pride in the greatness of his slaves. When a courtier expressed concern at the fact that Muḥammad bin Sām had no sons, the sultan replied, "I have many sons in my Turkish slaves; they will inherit my lands and continue the *khuṭbah* in my name when I am dead and gone." The slaves were first given minor household offices, and if they showed promise, they were gradually promoted to higher posts according to their merit, no office in the state being considered too high for them. Their power, at times, proved dangerous to the unity and stability of the empire. Īltutmish and Balban had to deal with powerful slave nobles of previous reigns and Fīrūz Shāh's last days were clouded by the machinations of some of his slaves whose misdoings ultimately resulted in anarchy; yet monarchy had to rely on its slaves against the high-handedness of nobles. Some of ‘Alā-u’d-dīn Muḥammad Khaljī's success can be attributed to his possession of fifty thousand slaves who not only formed fighting squads of guards and soldiers but were also employed in every branch of the administration.²

c9.88

⁶ Fatāwā-i-jahāndārī, ff. 71, 72; also Ottoman Statecraft on the employment of slaves.

c9.89

² Baranī, pp. 318, 319, 323; ‘Afīf, p. 272. Muḥammad bin Tughluq had 20,000 slaves, Masālik-u’l-abṣār, p 28.

c9.90

Even this number was surpassed in Fīrūz Shāh's reign when a separate department was organized to deal with the slaves. The generals were encouraged to take numerous prisoners and to present them to the sultan after proper training; one hundred and eighty thousand slaves are said to have been collected and entrusted with different kinds of work. The sultan's personal guard absorbed a large number. Whenever the monarch marched out, several thousands of these slaves would accompany him divided into bodies of archers and soldiers, some of them walking, some riding Arab and Turkish horses and some even on the backs of specially trained buffaloes. There was no department of the household or administration where they were not in evidence: the capital and the provinces were alike full of them. Even so the administration could not absorb them all; the sultan distributed many amongst schools and colleges for general and religious education. No less than twelve thousand were taught different arts and crafts so that they might set up as independent artisans; some were even sent to Mecca to spend their lives in prayer and meditation.¹ The slaves in the royal household received a salary of 20 to 125 tankahs in cash, in addition to food and clothing.² In view of their numbers it is not surprising that the slaves had to be administered by an independent department with its own officers, accounts office and treasury.³ The large number of slaves acquired by Fīrūz Shāh is a measure of his success in pacifying the sultanate after insurrection had raised its head in every nook and corner owing to Muḥammad bin Tughluq's harshness. These slaves were prisoners of war, captured rebels, and their multitude is an index to the progress of the royal arms in the refractory areas.⁴ Fīrūz Shāh displayed great sagacity in dealing with the captives. Instead of destroying them, he trained the prisoners to be useful and loyal citizens. Their lives had been spared and they had been well treated; naturally they became faithful supporters of the régime; large numbers were settled in outlying areas to form a nucleus of loyal citizens in every district which had hitherto been particularly recalcitrant.¹ These men enriched the life of the empire in every sphere and probably played a considerable part in bringing about the prosperity which was such a marked feature of the reign.²

c9.91

¹ Minhāj, p. 132.

c9.92

¹ ‘Afīf, pp. 268-273.

c9.93

² ‘Afīf, p. 270. Under Muḥammad bin Tughluq they were given ten tankahs a month in addition to rations and dress. S. A., p. 71; E. & D., iii, p. 577.

c9.94

³ ‘Afīf, p. 271.

c9.95

⁴ Idem, p. 268.

c9.96

¹ *‘Afif* (p. 270) mentions only the provinces, but Fīrūz could not have neglected the well-known method of maintaining peace by colonization.

c9.97

² *‘Afif*, pp. 288-302.

c9.98

A big institution like the imperial household naturally required a large commissariat; this was divided into departments called *kārkhānahs*. Their number may have varied in different reigns; under Fīrūz Shāh it was thirty-six.³ They were divided into two classes: *rātibī* and *ghair-rātibī*.⁴ Any *kārkhānah* which dealt in perishable goods came under the first classification; for instance, *kārkhānahs* providing food and fodder for the stables, the kennels, the kitchen were *rātibī*. The *sham‘-khānah*, which provided lamps and oil, was also *rātibī*. The *ghair-rātibī kārkhānahs* supplied clothes, uniforms, furniture, tents, and the like. Each *kārkhānah* was supervised by a distinguished noble holding the rank of a *malik* or a *khān* and had a *mutaṣarrif* who was responsible for the accounts and acted as the immediate supervisor. There was a chief *mutaṣarrif* for all the *kārkhānahs*; requisitions were first sent to him, and he passed them on to the *mutaṣarrif* concerned. A separate dīwān or accounts office existed under Fīrūz Shāh for the kārkhānahs, though the mutaṣarrifs had to deal with the dīwān-i-wizārat—the central accounts office—as well. At the end of each year the clerks of the kārkhānahs were sent for by the dīwān-i-wizārat and their accounts were audited.¹ The kārkhānahs bought their supplies in the open market and traders were eager to obtain orders.² There is very little indication of the working of the kārkhānahs in other reigns, though they are mentioned by contemporary authorities.³ In a story regarding the Ghaznavid Bahrām Shāh, the Ādāb-u'l-mulūk mentions three kārkhānah officers : a mihtar, or head ; a mushrif or supervisor ; and a taḥwīldār or treasurer.⁴ The first two correspond respectively with the noble at the head of the kārkhānah and the mutaṣarrif of Fīrūz Shāh's reign. It seems very likely that there was a treasurer for every kārkhānah at Dehlī as well. The literal meaning of the word kārkhānah is a workshop ; most of the kārkhānahs in the royal household were factories to manufacture articles for court use. The jāmdārkhānah, for instance, turned out the best cloth in the empire. Muḥammad bin Tughluq employed no less than five hundred workers in gold brocade and four thousand weavers of silk,⁵ who manufactured the cloth required by the household and for making the robes of honour which were so profusely bestowed.⁵ The sultan is reported to have distributed twenty thousand dresses annually.⁶ Great care was also bestowed on the manufacture of arms, engines of war, armour and other fighting equipment.

c9.99

³ The number thirty-six, however, seems to be traditional. One hears of thirty-six *kārkhānahs* under the Mughuls. The modern state of Jaipūr has maintained the tradition of thirty-six *kārkhānahs* though there have been many changes in their nature and organization.

c9.100

⁴ The following *kārkhānahs* are mentioned by name in various parts of the text (*‘Afif*):— *Rātibī*: *abdārkhānah*=water supply of the palace; the kitchen; *sham‘-dārkhānah*=the department of lights; *‘iṭrdārkhānah*=scents; *pāigāh*=stables and breeding of horses; *pilkhānah*=elephants; *sutūr*=oxen, mules; kennels; falcons; leopards; camels; medicines. *Ghair-rātibī*: *jāmdār-khānah* also called *jāmahdārkhānah*=wardrobe; *ṭashtdārkhānah*=ewer-bearer and baths; *‘alamkhānah*=standards; *kitābkhānah*=library; *ghari-yālkhānah*=time-keepers and gongs; *farrāshkhānah*=furniture and tents; *rikābkhanah*=saddlery, harness, etc., *zarrādkhānah*=armour and war material; *silaḥkhānah*=arms; jewels. There were two or even more *kārkhānahs* for certain requirements, for instance, a *jāmdārkhānah* of the right wing is mentioned.

c9.101

¹ 'Afīf, pp. 337-340.

c9.102

² Idem, p. 99.

c9.103

³ E.g., Baranī, pp. 50, 109 ; Sarwānī, f. 65a.

c9.104

⁴ A.M., f. 15a.

c9.105

⁵ E. & D., iii, p. 578 ; S.A., p. 51 ; Masālik-u'l-abṣār, p. 30.

c9.106

⁶ E. & D., iii, p. 578. I.B. (ii, p. 72) says that robes of honour were sent to every amir twice a year.

c9.107

Of the rātibī kārkhānahs, the pāigāh or the horse breeding department was the most extensive. There were five big centres near Dehlī under Fīrūz Shāh ; other sultans also took great care that the army was always kept well supplied with horses. Arab and Turkish horses found a ready market in India; horses were imported even from distant Russia.¹ No gift seems to have been more acceptable in those days than a horse, and Muhammad bin Tughluq is reported to have given away “ten thousand Arab horses of excellent breed” every year.² All this required a vast organization; the akhūrbek, or the superintendent of the royal horses, was one of the most important officials of the household.³ Generally there were two akhūrbeks, one for each wing.⁴ Elephants played such a decisive part in warfare that the monarch took care that no officer or tributary chief had too many of them.⁵ By far the largest number of elephants in the realm was maintained in the royal stables under an important officer called shahnah-i-fil.⁶ Sometimes each wing had a different shahnah-i-fil.⁷ A large number of camels, mules, bullocks and buffaloes also was kept for purposes of transport.⁸

c9.108

¹ ‘Afif, p. 340. The presence of the coins of the Dehlī sultans in Russia as well as Ibn Baṭṭūṭah’s evidence proves this, I.B., 1, p. 210; Masālik-u’l-abṣār, p. 22.

c9.109

² Masālik-u’l-abṣār, p. 30

c9.110

³ E.g., Minhāj, pp. 232, 242.

c9.111

⁴ E.g., Baranī, p. 24.

c9.112

⁵ Baranī, p. 594.

c9.113

⁶ Idem, pp. 24, 126.

c9.114

⁷ Idem, p. 24.

c9.115

⁸ Vide supra.

c9.116

The royal sport of hunting gave employment to several kārkhānahs. It was not only a favourite means of recreation, but also a good method of keeping the army in a state of readiness and efficiency, corresponding to the modern device of manœuvres on field days; for on occasions of grand hunts the sultan and his followers marched in battle array.⁹ When Hulāgū heard of Balban’s great interest in hunting, he praised the sultan for his insight and understanding in giving regular exercise to his army.¹⁰ A large number of hunting leopards, dogs and hawks were kept in the various kārkhānahs which specialized in training these animals and birds, breeding them in captivity or obtaining their young from the jungle.¹¹ The number of falconers alone, who accompanied the sultan on horseback, is estimated at a thousand to twelve hundred.¹ Each leopard had two or three men to look after it.² When the sultan rode out for a hunt, he was sometimes accompanied by five to six hundred courtiers, a thousand cavalry and a thousand infantry and archers.³ On these great occasions three thousand beaters were engaged to drive the quarry into the ring.⁴ Most of the game was distributed to the soldiers and the servants taking part in the hunt; the poor were not forgotten.⁵ Large forests were preserved near the capital itself besides the areas in the provinces noted for special game.⁶ An important officer, called *amīr-i-shikār*, was the ‘grand huntsman’; another noble, styled *nā’ib amīr-i-shikār*, assisted him.⁷

c9.117

⁹ ‘Afif, pp. 317-318; Baranī, p. 85; Masālik-u’l-abṣār, p. 35.

c9.118

¹⁰ Baranī, p. 55.

c9.119

¹¹ A.M., f. 41b; Baranī, pp. 54, 600; ‘Afif, pp. 317-318; Qirān-u’s-sa’dain, pp. 53, 54; Masālik-u’l-abṣār, p. 32

c9.120

¹ *Afīf*, p. 318; S.A., p. 68.

c9.121

² *Afīf*, p. 317.

c9.122

³ *Baranī*, p. 55.

c9.123

⁴ S.A., p. 68.

c9.124

⁵ *Afīf*, pp. 325-326, 329.

c9.125

⁶ *Idem*, pp. 319-328.

c9.126

⁷ *Minhāj*, p. 169; *Baranī*, p. 54; *Afīf*, p. 318.

c9.127

The *amīr-i-majlis* was responsible for organizing the sultan’s private parties, where the sultan met his friends.⁸ These parties were just social and cultural, and allowed the sultan to cultivate the society of the elect in his domains. Here gathered the most brilliant conversationalists, the best poets, historians, musicians and literati in the empire; in the dark days when the Muslim world was groaning under the yoke of the heathen Mongols, the court of Dehlī was the centre of all that was best in Muslim culture and art.⁹ It was in these assemblies that Khusraw sang his latest lyrics and Sa’d-i-manṭiqī and Najm-i-Intishār indulged in their philosophic hair-splitting.¹⁰ If the sultan happened to be so inclined, wine flowed freely, music rose in voluptuous strains and graceful dancers swayed in harmony with eastern melodies. Only those found favour here whose quick wit and ready tongue could brighten the gathering and add to the joy of the passing hour.¹ A number of men were paid large salaries ranging from twenty to forty thousand tankahs a year with the grant of a village or two just for acting as the sultan's companions.² The quality of a monarch's *nadīms* was very often an index to his character. A wise sultan chose the most accomplished men, so that he might utilize his leisure in broadening his outlook and cultivating the softer graces of life. It was through the influence of these *nadīms* that the court acted as the greatest patron of art and learning. It was considered impolitic to entrust them with any post in the public administration.³

c9.128

⁸ E.g., *Minhāj*, p. 238; *Baranī*, p. 174. Raverty (pp. 731-732) translates *amīr-i-majlis* as ‘lord of the assembly or council’ which is literally correct but misleading, because it conveys the sense that he presided over deliberative bodies of the state. The officer was also called *maliku’n-nudamā*, I.B., ii, p. 79.

c9.129

⁹ E.g., *Baranī*, pp. 111-114; vide also Chapter IX.

c9.130

¹⁰ *Baranī*, pp. 464-465.

c9.131

¹ E.g., Baranī, pp. 158-164.

c9.132

² S.A., p. 72.

c9.133

³ *Siyāsat-nāmah*, pp. 82-84. For *nadīms* under the Abbasid caliphs, vide, Burton : *Arabian Nights*, i, p. 46. The institution of *nadīms* is of very old origin, vide, Mez., pp. 143-144.

c9.134

The etiquette at the court was complex and exacting. The order of precedence of the various officials and members of the household was carefully defined and maintained.⁴ Except under Buhlūl Lodī, whose attitude was that of *primus inter pares*, the monarchs were treated with servile respect. On all public and semi-public occasions very few dignitaries were allowed to sit in the royal presence.⁵ The un-Islamic ceremony of kissing the ground in the presence of the monarch had been adopted by the Abbasids from whom it was passed on to Dehlī through the Ghaznavids.⁶ Even the jurists do not seem to have protested against this degrading custom; it was probably to respect their feelings that people of religious sanctity were exempted.¹ Even when the sultan was absent, the wazīrs and others saluted the throne on entering the hall of audience with so deep an obeisance that the head almost reached the ground and the backs of their fingers touched the floor.² This idea of paying homage to an absent monarch dates back to the Ghaznavids and even before their time, but it was probably carried to an extreme in the time of Islām Shāh Sūr. Every Friday the officials in the districts gathered in a solemn assembly where the regulations made by the sultan were read out and administered. The place of honour was occupied by an empty throne on which were placed the monarch's quiver and slippers.³

c9.135

⁴ *‘Afīf*, pp. 277-287.

c9.136

⁵ The custom seems to have varied in different reigns. I.B., (ii, pp. 35, 36) says everybody remained standing; *‘Afīf*, (pp. 280-287) mentions a few nobles who were allowed to sit.

c9.137

⁶ E g., Baranī, p. 142; *‘Afīf*, pp. 281-282; *‘Utbī*, p. 311; *Baihaqī*, pp. 6, 194, 268. It was called *zamīnbūs*.

c9.138

¹ E.g., Muḥammad bin Tughluq did not let Ibn Baṭṭūṭah kiss his feet (I.B., ii, p. 89); the shaikh-u'l-Islām was treated with great respect. 'Afīf, pp. 286-287.

c9.139

² I.B., ii, p. 74.

c9.140

³ Badā'ūnī, p. 385.

c9.141

A court so particular about formalities could not ignore the question of royal insignia. Khutbah, sikkah and ṭarāz have always been considered in Muslim countries to be the exclusive privilege of independent monarchs.⁴ The khutbah is a formal sermon preceding or following a congregational service, and its last part contains a prayer for the welfare of the Faithful and the sultan as the head of the community; mention in the khutbah was tantamount to formal recognition of sovereignty. The sultans who did not claim the caliphate for themselves had the name of the caliph recited with their own name, or prayers were offered for an unnamed caliph. If a claimant declared his independence, he removed his suzerain's name and substituted his own. The sultans did not allow the recitation of a subject's name in the khutbah. The only exception in the history of the sultanate of Dehlī is Fīrūz Shāh's consent to the inclusion of his son's name in the khutbah; but Fīrūz had practically abdicated.⁵ Sikkah, or the right of coining money, was also a royal privilege and every monarch who came to a throne, and each claimant who declared independence, struck at least a few pieces to commemorate the event. The assumption of royalty was proclaimed by at least these two methods. Ṭarāz was the weaving or embroidering of the royal name on pieces of silk or gold brocade; no other name could be embroidered on fabrics.¹ There were several other tokens of royalty: ‘Afīf gives a list of twenty-one.² But the privilege of using some of them was granted to the nobles or the tributary chiefs to exalt them above others: no real importance was attached to these minor distinctions.

c9.142

⁴ J.Z., p. 96.

c9.143

⁵ Tārī'h-i-Mubārakshāhī, pp 127-138.

c9.144

¹ J.Z., pp. 103-105; I’jāz-i-Khusrawī, i, p. 13; Baranī, p. 493, Kulliyāt-i-Ḥasan Sajzī, p. 338

c9.145

² ‘Afīf, pp. 107-109. The most important of these were the royal umbrellas. Khusraw (Qirān-u’s-sa’dain, pp. 74-78) describes umbrellas of five colours—red, black, white, green and pink. The dūrbāsh has been described in Qirān-u’s-sa’dain, p. 78. Also, vide Sīrat-i-Fīrūzshāhī, p. 160.

c9.146

It will be a mistake to under-rate the share of the royal household in the actual administration of the sultanate. The royal bodyguard and picked household troops not only kept the nobles under discipline but also fought the battles of the empire whenever the need arose; the ḥājibs commanded armies and acted as a general staff; the kārkhānahs manufactured the goods required by the army and other departments of the state; the royal stables bred horses and other animals required for war and transport, and the palace served as the training ground for future administrators and statesmen. Politically, socially and culturally the court was the heart of the sultanate.

Linked texts (4)

Vaiṣṇava Dharmaśāstra — Viṣṇu, Sanskrit
تحفة النظار في غرائب الأمصار وعجائب الأسفار — Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, Arabic
Tārīkh-i Fīrūzshāhī — Shams-i Sirāj ʿAfīf
Ṭabaqāt-i Nāṣirī — Minhāj al-Dīn Jūzjānī